Home · Register · Search · View Winners · Software · Hosting · Software · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username   Password

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Alternative Gear & Lenses | Join Upload & Sell

1       2      
3
       4              9       10       end
  

Archive 2011 · Zeiss 35mm F2 vs Samyang 35mm F1.4
  
 
denoir
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #1 · p.3 #1 · Zeiss 35mm F2 vs Samyang 35mm F1.4


Tariq Gibran wrote:
This is the sort of shot I would expect to see major LocA in but to me, it really does not stand out as an issue with the Rokinon:


Ehm..that's some pretty heavily LoCA infested bokeh Tariq. All those sharp harsh edges in the bokeh are LoCA. Without it it would have been a smooth continuous surface. Whether one likes it or not aesthetically is down to individual preference, but major LoCA it is.


Tariq Gibran wrote:
See, if you had the Samyang/ Rokinon, you could not only enjoy tack sharp corner to corner performance at infinity across the frame stopped down but also nice oof backgrounds at brighter f-stops without that oblong cateye-bokeh I'm seeing in a few of these shots from the Zeiss.


Corner performance of the 35/2 Distagon stopped down is no problem. It's the micro contrast in the fine detail that I'm not fond of. There's actually only one 35mm lens that I think is really good for landscape photography - the 35/2 Biogon ZM.

As for OOF backgrounds, if the shot you posted is representative, then no thanks A bit disappointing as I've really liked what I've seen from the Samyang/Rokinon 85/1.4...



Aug 28, 2011 at 04:22 AM
Sp12
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #2 · p.3 #2 · Zeiss 35mm F2 vs Samyang 35mm F1.4


denoir wrote:
Wayne, yeah, I'm a bit skeptical especially about the LoCA. Cavewalker demonstrated clearly that the Samyang produces a lot more LoCA than the 35/1.4 Distagon. And the 35/1.4 distagon produces more LoCA than the 35/2 Distagon.

The LoCA would be visible as green rings around the highlights in the bokeh:


Technically incorrect. http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=3&ved=0CCkQFjAC&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.zeiss.de%2FC12567A8003B8B6F%2FEmbedTitelIntern%2FCLN_35_Bokeh_EN%2F%24File%2FCLN35_Bokeh_en.pdf&rct=j&q=bokeh%20green%20outline&ei=CsJZTq-tEMq_gQfvodiLDA&usg=AFQjCNGo-T2HVPl_zXg6WOB7JWGLQkO5Qg&sig2=pIIl3gdEyuorrSEEnwmLXQ&cad=rja

Green rings around the highlights have almost nothing to do with a CA correction, and everything do with SA correction. Page 37-39 of that PDF can fill you in with the details. Green rings (spherochromaticism) is definitely not a CA effect (well, 90% not a CA effect). Even APO glass can have it. It's a SA effect. We can definitely agree it's one of the worst points on the Samyang 35.

I'd say the Samyang is definitely a winner over the Zeiss 35/2 and 35/1.4 in terms of CA and LoCA correction. It just has overcorrected SA at longer distances and undercorrected at close. Meaning you get glow at closeups and sort of ugly bokeh at moderate distances.

Edit: D: have you ever used the 35-70? It's my favorite landscape 35, plus it does decent macro and 36-70. Plus, please read pages 37-38 before implying I haven't read it. I was consulted in the writing OF it.


Edited on Aug 28, 2011 at 04:35 AM · View previous versions



Aug 28, 2011 at 04:26 AM
denoir
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #3 · p.3 #3 · Zeiss 35mm F2 vs Samyang 35mm F1.4


Yes, perhaps you should read that document. Green edges around highlights are a textbook example of LoCA.

But if the lens is stopped down one stop (charts on the bottom and above on the right-hand side), the reversal point of the longitudinal spherical aberration is excluded and the brightness profiles look pleasant again. In this example we can also see that the brightness profiles become flatter when the image is blurred more.
In reality the brightness gradient at the edge of the blur circle is not as high as shown in above charts. They had been calculated for a single wavelength, but in reality different colours have different circles, which makes things a bit more smooth. Real lenses
...Show more

And a bit down:

Image 4 Circle of confusion is about 1/90 of the image diagonal;
The exposure with f/1.4 shows the bright green fringe at the edge of the blur
circle due to spherical and chromatic aberration


Edited on Aug 28, 2011 at 04:34 AM · View previous versions



Aug 28, 2011 at 04:30 AM
FlyPenFly
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #4 · p.3 #4 · Zeiss 35mm F2 vs Samyang 35mm F1.4


I'm basing this off of Photozone's numbers.

Zeiss


Samyang



Zeiss


Samyang


Zeiss


Samyang



Aug 28, 2011 at 04:30 AM
Tariq Gibran
Online
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #5 · p.3 #5 · Zeiss 35mm F2 vs Samyang 35mm F1.4


Color fringing in the oof transitional edges is what bothers me about LoCA and I don't see it. I do see it in the oof areas in a few of your shots. The last one taken with the Rollei shows some pretty severe cyan eges to the white bokeh at the far right corner and what looks like green as well towards the center. 100 percent, uncorrected crops would show this pretty clearly I bet. Even the previous glass shot and the potted roses with the 35 F2 shows some blue tinge in the white which is likely LoCA, though it may also be form some blue in the sky. Overall, to me, the bokeh from the Zeiss shots you have posted are exactly what I try to avoid though it's all personal preference in the end.


Aug 28, 2011 at 04:33 AM
FlyPenFly
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #6 · p.3 #6 · Zeiss 35mm F2 vs Samyang 35mm F1.4


The Samyang also has cat eye bokeh...




Zeiss




Aug 28, 2011 at 04:36 AM
denoir
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #7 · p.3 #7 · Zeiss 35mm F2 vs Samyang 35mm F1.4


Tariq Gibran wrote:
Color fringing in the oof transitional edges is what bothers me about LoCA and I don't see it. I do see it in the oof areas in a few of your shots. The last one taken with the Rollei shows some pretty severe cyan eges to the white bokeh at the far right corner and what looks like green as well towards the center. 100 percent, uncorrected crops would show this pretty clearly I bet. Even the previous glass shot and the potted roses with the 35 F2 shows some blue tinge in the white which is likely LoCA,
...Show more

The Rollei 35/1.4 Distagon shows indeed plenty of LoCA, but the 35/2 is a different story with much better LoCA control. The down side is that it produces a rather dull, neutral bokeh which may or may not suit your taste.



Aug 28, 2011 at 04:46 AM
Tariq Gibran
Online
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #8 · p.3 #8 · Zeiss 35mm F2 vs Samyang 35mm F1.4


FlyPenFly wrote:
The Samyang also has cat eye bokeh...

http://www.photozone.de/images/8Reviews/lenses/samyang_35_14_d3x/bokeh.jpg

Zeiss

http://www.photozone.de/images/8Reviews/lenses/zeiss_zf_35_20_ff/bokeh.jpg


In my testing, it seemed like it only showed up at close to minimum focus distances, not at distances typically used. I also found that the bokeh looked better stopped down to say 2.8 vs. wide open.

You may not want to rely too much on photozone tests as I believe their tests are performed at very close distances and most lenses will perform dramatically different when used at typical shooting distances which are longer.



Aug 28, 2011 at 04:48 AM
RustyBug
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #9 · p.3 #9 · Zeiss 35mm F2 vs Samyang 35mm F1.4


Tariq Gibran wrote:
You may not want to rely too much on photozone tests as I believe their tests are performed at very close distances and most lenses will perform dramatically different when used at typical shooting distances which are longer.


+1
I would think this is particularly pertinent for "Distagon" designed glass.

RustyBug wrote:
Of course, as always with Zeiss, it's a dicey thing to consider reviews that do not include infinity as telling the whole story.


Green fringe, purple fringe, CA, LoCa, Sa, nervous bokeh, jittery bokeh, etc. call it what you will ... I just know I don't like it. It seems that the stronger the micro-contrast the more potential there is for the jittery/harsh bokeh as part of the tradeoff, and fringing as well

While the Samyang is doing some admirable things ... they don't seem to have quite as good of control over the penalties ... even though the test charts indicate well ... the green fringe is still more readily apparent in their test images than the 35/2. To be a bit fair to the Samyang, I would expect an f2 to be better behaved than an f1.4 ... but being fair or bang for the buck is not the same as performance. (versatility of the 1.4 for skinny DOF duly noted).


Edited on Aug 28, 2011 at 05:19 AM · View previous versions



Aug 28, 2011 at 05:10 AM
denoir
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #10 · p.3 #10 · Zeiss 35mm F2 vs Samyang 35mm F1.4


Sp12 wrote:
Green rings around the highlights have almost nothing to do with a CA correction, and everything do with SA correction. Page 37-39 of that PDF can fill you in with the details. Green rings (spherochromaticism) is definitely not a CA effect (well, 90% not a CA effect). Even APO glass can have it. It's a SA effect. We can definitely agree it's one of the worst points on the Samyang 35.


It's not spherochromatism that we're seeing.

Here's a simple example of the difference:
http://peltarion.eu/img/comp/color/loca.jpg

The 100 MP is highly corrected for SA while the 85 Planar is not. If you see only a green edge then it's LoCA. If you see a degradation of contrast and a general smearing then it's SA (spherochromaticism).

have you ever used the 35-70? It's my favorite landscape 35, plus it does decent macro and 36-70.

No, not really. But from what I can see in the MTF charts, I'm pretty sure I wouldn't like it for landscapes. ("like" in this case is a relative term)



Aug 28, 2011 at 05:15 AM
 

Search in Used Dept. 



RustyBug
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #11 · p.3 #11 · Zeiss 35mm F2 vs Samyang 35mm F1.4


denoir wrote:
No, not really. But from what I can see in the MTF charts, I'm pretty sure I wouldn't like it for landscapes. ("like" in this case is a relative term)


What makes you say that ??



Aug 28, 2011 at 05:21 AM
denoir
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #12 · p.3 #12 · Zeiss 35mm F2 vs Samyang 35mm F1.4


RustyBug wrote:
What makes you say that ??


http://peltarion.eu/img/comp/mtf/mtf-3570.JPG

There are a couple of things that I want from a landscape lens:

1) Limited field curvature
2) Parallel sagittal and tangential lines (i.e. consistent blur & micro contrast regardless of direction)
3) High micro contrast in the fine detail (i.e 40 lp/mm).

The 35-70 @ 35mm doesn't qualify because of 2 & 3. The 35 Lux because of 1) and the 35/2 Distagon ZE because of 1, 2 & 3.



Aug 28, 2011 at 05:39 AM
Toothwalker
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #13 · p.3 #13 · Zeiss 35mm F2 vs Samyang 35mm F1.4


FlyPenFly wrote:
I'm basing this off of Photozone's numbers.
http://www.photozone.de/images/8Reviews/lenses/zeiss_zf_35_20_ff/mtf.png


MTF parameter space is large. There are four critical parameters that should be documented with any test report: aperture (f-number), image height (center, border, ...), image magnification (object distance), and object orientation (sagittal or tangential). PZ only gives the first two parameters, whereas the influence of the last two can be as big or bigger. I'll have to dismiss such test reports.


http://www.photozone.de/images/8Reviews/lenses/zeiss_zf_35_20_ff/ca.png


And chromatic aberration that increases with the f-number is nonsense.




Aug 28, 2011 at 11:24 AM
FlyPenFly
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #14 · p.3 #14 · Zeiss 35mm F2 vs Samyang 35mm F1.4


If you look at Lenstip, they seem to show the same thing.






Aug 28, 2011 at 12:28 PM
FlyPenFly
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #15 · p.3 #15 · Zeiss 35mm F2 vs Samyang 35mm F1.4


Denoir: Would you say the C/Y 28mm F2.8 then is a better lens than the 35mm for Landscape photography?

It seems a bit odd that a "Distagon" would be so poor for landscapes.



Aug 28, 2011 at 12:34 PM
denoir
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #16 · p.3 #16 · Zeiss 35mm F2 vs Samyang 35mm F1.4


"Distagon" simply means that it's a retrofocus design (i.e. inverted tele). What makes you think it's poor for landscapes? It's very good for landscapes! It's just not as good as the 35 Biogon, which is not far away from the legendary 21/2.8 Distagon.

As for the C/Y 28 f/2.8, definitely not. It's good in the center of the frame but the quality drops rapidly as you move away from the center.



Aug 28, 2011 at 01:16 PM
Toothwalker
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #17 · p.3 #17 · Zeiss 35mm F2 vs Samyang 35mm F1.4


FlyPenFly wrote:
If you look at Lenstip, they seem to show the same thing.

http://www.lenstip.com/upload3/2641_aberracja_15.jpg

http://www.lenstip.com/upload2/15302_zei35_abISO.jpg


Lateral chromatic aberration, the issue at hand here, is independent of the aperture but at large lens openings it may be obscured by other aberrations. As the lens is stopped down, these other aberrations are cured and LCA becomes more clearly visible. Not because there is more LCA, but because other blur mechanisms are taken away. A problem with these sites is that they don't seem to know what they are doing. They do not measure chromatic aberration, but apparent color fringing. A subtle but important difference.






Aug 28, 2011 at 01:16 PM
AhamB
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #18 · p.3 #18 · Zeiss 35mm F2 vs Samyang 35mm F1.4


denoir wrote:
As for the C/Y 28 f/2.8, definitely not. It's good in the center of the frame but the quality drops rapidly as you move away from the center.


So what. Stop down to f/8 or f/11 and you have a great rendering and corner to corner sharpness. To get something better you have to pay a LOT more (Leica Elmarit 28/2.8 v2). I'd hope the Z* 28/2 does better than the Contax too.


Edited on Aug 28, 2011 at 01:26 PM · View previous versions



Aug 28, 2011 at 01:21 PM
denoir
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #19 · p.3 #19 · Zeiss 35mm F2 vs Samyang 35mm F1.4


AhamB wrote:
So what. Stop down to f/8 or f/11 and you have a great rendering and corner to corner sharpness. To get something better you have to pay a LOT more (Leica Elmarit 28/2.8 v2).



It's not the sharpness that is an issue, it's the contrast in the fine detail. You're below 50% for 40 lp/mm by mid frame at f/5.6 and it is more likely that it gets worse at f/8 than that it gets better.

Mind you, I've never used the lens - I'm just reading the MTF charts.



Aug 28, 2011 at 01:26 PM
AhamB
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #20 · p.3 #20 · Zeiss 35mm F2 vs Samyang 35mm F1.4


For traditional landscapes I'm sure that those flaws you mention are easily detectable with the Contax, especially for you. I'm pretty sure that I've seen them too. I love the rendering of the lens with anything a little bit closer (trees and stuff), it's stunning. Maybe quite similar to the Z* 35/2 in a way.


Aug 28, 2011 at 01:32 PM
1       2      
3
       4              9       10       end




FM Forums | Alternative Gear & Lenses | Join Upload & Sell

1       2      
3
       4              9       10       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username   Password    Reset password